The UP College of Mass Communication Foundation has publicly acknowledged that P4.4 million is missing from its accounts, providing its most detailed explanation yet of a controversy that erupted into public view following its June 22 General Assembly.
The disclosure comes days after a tense post-assembly exchange involving Broadcast Communication professor Cecile Ilagan and foundation officials, during which questions about the foundation’s finances, governance, and accountability were openly raised. During discussions that followed the meeting, the missing funds were described as having been “stolen,” a characterization that quickly became part of the controversy surrounding the organization.
In its first comprehensive statement on the issue, however, the foundation adopted different language.
Rather than describing the funds as stolen, the organization said an external audit covering the period from 2021 to 2025 found that P4.4 million had been “misappropriated” by certain individual or individuals.
The distinction is notable. While the foundation’s formal statement repeatedly uses the terms “misappropriated” and “taken,” it stops short of characterizing the alleged loss as theft. Whether that difference reflects legal caution, audit findings, or a more precise description of what foundation officials believe occurred remains unclear.
What is clear is that the foundation is no longer disputing that millions of pesos are unaccounted for.
According to the statement, the amount consists of approximately P1.4 million from completed projects and another P2.9 million from operating and institutional funds intended to support the UP College of Mass Communication and its staff.
The foundation said the losses were uncovered through an external audit conducted between August 2025 and January 2026. Based on the audit’s findings, the Board of Trustees approved resolutions authorizing legal counsel to pursue legal remedies against those allegedly responsible and recover the missing funds.
“The UPCMCFI has built a strong case over the past months and is currently in the process of filing cases to recover the funds,” the statement said.
The organization declined to identify the individuals allegedly involved, saying the release of names, evidence, and supporting details could compromise legal preparations and future court proceedings.
The statement also sought to clear acting president Malou Choa-Fagar of allegations circulating on social media.
According to the foundation, Fagar never had access, possession, or control over the funds in question and should not be linked to the alleged loss. The organization said she accepted the responsibility of presiding over the June 22 General Assembly after the foundation’s ex-officio vice chair and president formally disassociated themselves from the organization earlier this month.
Beyond the issue of the missing funds, the foundation defended the conduct of the June 22 General Assembly and rejected claims that members were unfairly prevented from participating. It maintained that notices and requirements were communicated in advance and that only members in good standing were entitled to attend and vote.
The organization further alleged that some individuals who later criticized the proceedings had initially expressed an intention to boycott the assembly and had failed to comply with membership requirements.
The statement marks a significant development in a controversy that, until now, had largely centered on questions raised by faculty members, alumni, and stakeholders seeking explanations regarding the foundation’s finances.
Now, the foundation itself is acknowledging that P4.4 million is missing and says it believes it has identified wrongdoing serious enough to warrant legal action.
Yet major questions remain unanswered.
Who allegedly took the funds? How were the losses discovered? What internal controls failed to prevent them? And will the audit findings eventually be made available for independent scrutiny?
Those questions are likely to remain at the center of the controversy as the matter moves from public debate toward what the foundation says could soon become a legal battle.
